Remsen v. Remsen
New York Court of Chancery
THIS was a question of practice, as to the mode of taking testimony, on an order of reference, before a master, and came up on the report of James A. Hamilton, one of the masters of this Court.
Read the full summary
THIS was a question of practice, as to the mode of taking testimony, on an order of reference, before a master, and came up on the report of James A. Hamilton, one of the masters of this Court. He stated, that under an order of reference, to take and state an account between the parties in this case, the parties appeared before him, and it was urged by the counsel for the defendant, that the plaintiff should exhibit his charges in writing, and that the testimony, in support of the allegations of the parties, should be taken by the master in writing, privately, upon interrogatories; and that…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
[ * 499 ]
I am not surprised that there should be doubts as to the practice in this case. So late as Parkinson v. Ingram, (3 Vesey, 603.) it was a serious question, whether the master could take the examination of a witness in any case, and whether all examinations, as well after as before a decree, must not be taken by the examiner. But it was declared, in that case, to be the settled practice for the master to take the examinations on references before ■ him; and it would seem that the witnesses were summoned, *under the usual subpoena, to appear, and answer ; and that the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Dennis v. DennisCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1860
- Patterson v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- Heffron v. RiceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1891
- Williams v. LindblomIllinois Supreme Court · 1896
- Jenkins v. International BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.